DeAnne
Mike CrowlHealth Care Reform - LOL
December 30th 2009 22:56
I'm laughing, but it's not really funny. It's scary as hell!
Health care reform is an issue that is near and dear to me, as it is to so many others. But what I see happening isn't good reform. The only people I see this so-called reform helping is the insurance companies. I'ts not gonna get better, it's gonna get worse!
I just don't see why anyone would be against a National Health Plan. Well, I guess I can see arguments against it - or against OUR government running it. Those arguments don't outweigh the actual NEED for it, however.
We NEED a national health plan. We NEED to get rid of the greedy insurance companies. We NEED to provide quality health care for EVERYONE in this country.
Single Payer plans never even got to see a vote, but they're good plans. Good for everyone, except the insurance companies (and their stockholders!).
Several different plans are floating around out there - HR 676, HR 1200, and others I can't recall. Most are similar - they offer a Single Payer, National Health Plan - or Enhanced Medicare for All.
The plan - in a nutshell:
Care would be based on need, not on ability to pay. All Americans would receive comprehensive medical benefits under single-payer. Coverage would include all medically necessary services, including rehabilitative, long-term, and home care; mental healthcare, prescription drugs, and medical supplies; and preventive and public health measures. Services not considered medically necessary would have to be paid out-of-pocket.
Government would serve as administrator, not employer. Hospital billing would be virtually eliminated. Instead, hospitals would receive an annual lump-sum payment from the government to cover operating expenses—a “global budget.” A separate budget would cover such expenses as hospital expansion, the purchase of technology, marketing, etc. Doctors would have three options for payment: fee-for-service, salaried positions in hospitals, and salaried positions within group practices or HMOs. Fees would be negotiated between a representative of the fee-for-service practitioners (such as the state medical society) and a state payment board.
95% of all Americans will pay less for their healthcare than they are currently paying.
• Eliminates all employer contributions to private insurance premiums—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 4.5% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
• Eliminates all individual premiums, co-pays, deductibles and nearly all other out-of-pocket costs—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 3.3% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
• Relieves state and local governments of the immense burden of paying insurance premiums for medical coverage for their current and retired employees—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 4.5% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
Everyone benefits. Patients still have a choice of doctors and facilities, they just don't have to worry about filing insurance claims, and whether or not the insurance company will pay for the treatment. Doctors benefit because in the long run, they'll probably have more patients which means more money. Hospitals benefit for the same reasons. Also, they don't have the headaches of dealing with the insurance companies. Businesses benefit because they don't have to worry with providing health plans for employees, less paperwork. The increased taxes will be less than the premiums already paid.
The only people who don't benefit are insurance companies. The employees who will be out of work, because of the insurance companies going out of business, will be the ones who are employed by the government to run the new program.
This is the best way to go. This is what we need.
Health care reform is an issue that is near and dear to me, as it is to so many others. But what I see happening isn't good reform. The only people I see this so-called reform helping is the insurance companies. I'ts not gonna get better, it's gonna get worse!
I just don't see why anyone would be against a National Health Plan. Well, I guess I can see arguments against it - or against OUR government running it. Those arguments don't outweigh the actual NEED for it, however.
We NEED a national health plan. We NEED to get rid of the greedy insurance companies. We NEED to provide quality health care for EVERYONE in this country.
Single Payer plans never even got to see a vote, but they're good plans. Good for everyone, except the insurance companies (and their stockholders!).
Several different plans are floating around out there - HR 676, HR 1200, and others I can't recall. Most are similar - they offer a Single Payer, National Health Plan - or Enhanced Medicare for All.
The plan - in a nutshell:
Care would be based on need, not on ability to pay. All Americans would receive comprehensive medical benefits under single-payer. Coverage would include all medically necessary services, including rehabilitative, long-term, and home care; mental healthcare, prescription drugs, and medical supplies; and preventive and public health measures. Services not considered medically necessary would have to be paid out-of-pocket.
Government would serve as administrator, not employer. Hospital billing would be virtually eliminated. Instead, hospitals would receive an annual lump-sum payment from the government to cover operating expenses—a “global budget.” A separate budget would cover such expenses as hospital expansion, the purchase of technology, marketing, etc. Doctors would have three options for payment: fee-for-service, salaried positions in hospitals, and salaried positions within group practices or HMOs. Fees would be negotiated between a representative of the fee-for-service practitioners (such as the state medical society) and a state payment board.
95% of all Americans will pay less for their healthcare than they are currently paying.
• Eliminates all employer contributions to private insurance premiums—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 4.5% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
• Eliminates all individual premiums, co-pays, deductibles and nearly all other out-of-pocket costs—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 3.3% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
• Relieves state and local governments of the immense burden of paying insurance premiums for medical coverage for their current and retired employees—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 4.5% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
Everyone benefits. Patients still have a choice of doctors and facilities, they just don't have to worry about filing insurance claims, and whether or not the insurance company will pay for the treatment. Doctors benefit because in the long run, they'll probably have more patients which means more money. Hospitals benefit for the same reasons. Also, they don't have the headaches of dealing with the insurance companies. Businesses benefit because they don't have to worry with providing health plans for employees, less paperwork. The increased taxes will be less than the premiums already paid.
The only people who don't benefit are insurance companies. The employees who will be out of work, because of the insurance companies going out of business, will be the ones who are employed by the government to run the new program.
This is the best way to go. This is what we need.
| 18 |
| Vote |
